I take it all back, Trump DOES have the answers…I’m all on board now that I know he has a plan to “take out the slums” and create “crime free zones” where crime is illegal. BRILLIANT! Why hasn’t anyone else thought to try that?
I have to admit he really knows how to solve America’s issues, I can ignore all the criminality and fascism and failed policies now. 🤦‍♂️

Dishonest morons go to Cuba looking for problems and find some. Duh.


Every shortage problem they decry is caused by America's embargo. Gas shortages....because America won't let them import it. Old cars....because America won't allow them to import any new ones. Medicine shortages, no fresh food out of season in cities...
because America won't let them to export anything to be able to afford it, or use credit. No international investments...because America won't allow it. No American tourism (meaning by any American company or subsidiaries, or travel that includes America like cruise ships or international air travel), because America won't allow it. No money, because America won't let them export anything or exploit tourism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba

Cuba was doing just fine before we embargoed them into abject poverty for 60+ years. Cuba is doing far better today than they represent.

These are slums and abandoned buildings. Go to Detroit slums, you morons. It's worse, and not because it's communist. Try 5th ward Houston, same thing. Try Florida, plenty of hurricane ravaged ruins there too. American slums don't have communism to dishonestly blame.

Try flying your drone where it's not allowed in America, the cops will be at your door again, and this time you're going to prison, not the embassy, idiots.

And who do they claim is suggesting we convert to communism in America? Probably these morons don't know the difference between communism and socialism and assume their audience doesn't either, or the difference between pure communist socialism and democratic socialism, and don't know America already is a democratic socialist country. Such utter bullshit...it is from turningpoint USA after all.

So sad this is what the right calls informative.

Edit: don't take the above as an endorsement of communism, it's not one. It's a lambasting of dishonest propagandists twisting reality to suit their political narrative.

Did you fall on your head as a child? Those people taking a knee aren't bashing America. They aren't bashing the flag, the troops, or anything like that. They are peacefully protesting injustice.

As has been pointed out by many many people, Rosa Parks wasn't protesting public transpiration, the Greensboro sit-ins weren't about Woolworth's dominance in retail at the time... they were all protesting injustice. How can that really simple little fact be ignored by Trump and his supporters? Are they so brain washed by him, that they'll believe every little pile of shit that comes out of his mouth. Do they want to suck his cock that bad? They need to fucking learn to think for themselves. Learn to vet information... and actually vet, not just find the first couple Google answers.

Somehow it is okay for a bunch of white Nazis to protest, and that is fine, and free speech, but the instant a black man protests injustice, suddenly he's an ass hole who needs to be fired? Over 400,000 Americans died fighting Nazis, but now according to Trump, Nazis are "very fine people". No they are not. Not a single person who's a Nazi, KKK member, white nationalist, or would march with them are very fine, or even fine, or even good. They are all evil.

The fact that most on the right think Jesus would side with a Nazi over a black man's protest of injustice (because, if you are a Christian, then every thought has to be what would Jesus do in that case) just goes to show how evil, and horrible the right's Jesus is. It's why I'd rather me and my children burn in Hell than be around people like those Nazis, and that Jesus who'd love them more than the black man protesting the injustice his people still endure to this day. I'll do everything in my power to insure my children hate the Jesus that the right promotes. No wonder Christianity is loosing numbers, it's a faith about hatred and bigotry, the love that Christ promoted in the Bible, is no longer there. They may think they show love, but I can 100% assure them, from the outside looking in, all anyone sees from that form of Christianity, is hatred and bigotry, and as it is the dominant form of Christianity in America, it is all anybody ever sees. I hope there is a Heaven and Hell, and I hope that God points to the millions of souls burning in Hell because of their bigotry and hatred... I'd love it if for the first 20 billion years they had to live outside the gates of Heaven, or in the slums of heaven, hearing the torrents of those of us in Hell, knowing they personally are the reason we are there, that we were all turned off Christ because of the way modern Christians act.

Here's a thought, instead of adding $600 billion dollars to the US military budget, we could use some of that money to push broadband out to every home in the US.

When every struggling post-boom town has high speed internet, we just need to push the dinosaurs who resist "work from home" out of senior management positions in the corporate world and we'll have a migration towards the smaller, more remote communities, where property values are much lower.

It will mean that sprawl subdivisions will become the new slums...but that just provides incentive to bulldoze those warts off the map and return the lost farmland.

The paradigm shift would spark massive economic growth.

Naw...we need more tactical stealth fighters.

It's not inhumane ('humane' being another oxymoron, because it's meaning, and acting like a normal human, are opposites) because 1)they have a life at all, which they would not if not given the opportunity by my family 2) they have a place to live that life, which they would not if not given the use of the land and 3) nature also creates barriers to movement, so it's not unnatural for an animal to live it's entire lifespan in one place...perhaps for cattle, but not the rest. Farm animals are not humans, and those that have an aversion to being stationary have no place on a farm. You could say that not being nomadic is 'inhumane', as our natural state is not sedentary, but few would argue it's 'cruel'.
'Animals' are not humans, so are not slaves. That idea makes you sound ridiculous. See the South Park episode for a good example.
Stopping suffering is not within our scope.
There are many reasons why stopping meat eating is not reasonable, but the one you should be the most interested in is, if humans didn't eat cattle, they might be extinct. The same goes for many animals we eat, and if we didn't eat things like pork, the ecological disaster feral pigs create would be almost as bad as what humans do.
It would be easier and cheaper to change the conditions in the slums of India and elsewhere than it would be to eradicate the meat production (edit:and consumption) of the entire planet. What do the people do now that no longer have jobs? What do you do with all the animals that no longer have a 'use' and don't own property to move onto? How do you control their numbers so they don't destroy what's left of the planet?
Technically, yes, all humans are animals. Mentally handicapped humans are not TREATED 'like animals', by which you MEAN treated poorly and without thought for their comfort and well being, which in fact is NOT how most animals are treated in our first world society, no matter how much you think so. Factory farms are a different matter.
When dolphins take control, they can treat mentally handicapped dolphins better than average humans. It's not arbitrary to treat your own species as the most important, it's an evolutionary trait almost all species likely possess.
No, I can't eat an entire vegan diet. I've tried many vegan foods, and found them ALL inedible, some made me sick.

You made blanket statements about how ALL animals are treated, and how ALL meat is produced and then defended that blanket statement. I'm glad you now admit your mistake, I hope you can see it through and stop blanket blaming ALL meat eaters.

What other people eat is farther outside your influence than how they treat their children.

Without the calorie dense food that is 'meat', we would still be nomadic gatherers, if we could exist at all. Eating meat is one of the things that gave us the energy to evolve those 'higher brains' that can choose our actions and determine what's 'rational'.
You will never see a vegan Olympic athlete. (Edit: well, maybe in Olympic curling...)

Daesh has brought about change...a change that THEY see as positive. That's not a good argument.

Yes, you are a monster for supporting such unabashed, unproductive carnivores ;-)...and I would hazard a guess that you don't feed them only free range, gmo free turkey carcasses, so you sound worse than me, the unashamed meat eater that pays the extra money for proper animal treatment....not just for them but because it's healthier meat too.

I did my part for the animals and the planet by not having children. ;-) Too bad I'm such a minority that it won't make a whit of difference.

@newtboy: Just to be clear, I really appreciate your comments. It's nice to talk to an omnivore who doesn't just respond with "I'LL EAT TWICE AS MUCH MEAT AS YOU DO TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR VEGANISM!" I'm trying to be objective, and I appreciate your attempt as well.

That being said...

I respect the genuine care you give to your animals. I didn't know you or your family (or both) owned such a farm. It does sound like you do, truly, meet their needs as animals. However, (and I hate to bring out the really controversial stuff), I'm sure plenty of slave-owners treated their slaves with genuine humanity. But that doesn't excuse the categorical enslavement of other beings. Despite all care given to those animals, they are still not able to live their natural lives as animals on earth. I don't see why our subjugation, no matter how "humane", can be considered anything less than "inhumane".

Now, the comparison to "most children in the world" is a moot one. Yes, of course everywhere there are going to be worse things happening. But the point is that we are rational, (hopefully) decent, higher-order-understanding-of-the-universe beings. Humans seem to like to cherry-pick when their huge brain is an excuse for greatness, or ignored and "we're just animals after all". So, just because there is suffering outside the scope of our influence, we do all have the ability to stop eating meat. Pretty easily, in fact, since there are tons and tons and tons of other means to get all the nutrition we need (not to mention way, way healthier means).

The point is that we are completely and totally (especially as upper-middle class 1st-world citizens) capable of not eating meat this very moment. You can't, however, change the living conditions in the slums of India by yourself right now.

And explain to me how mentally handicapped humans are not animals. What is the distinction? They are both objectively less intelligent. If anything, animals are more capable of surviving on their own. What makes mentally handicapped people any more special than animals? Just because they're human? That seems arbitrary. True, they should be treated differently because they are different animals, but I mean why should one be treated to our moral consideration and one should not? What makes humans so damn special?

And that "sustenance" argument is really, really misguided. As said above, you can eat an entire vegan diet and be probably even more healthy than an omnivore. And animals are not minimally suffering. Yes, a very cherished, rare group, as your animals are, are "minimally suffering", but many, many, many, many more are being horribly abused for that sustenance that can be gained elsewhere (with suffering of its own, truly. I always hear the "well, there are people given slave wages to pick vegetables in California". But, you'll be eating those vegetables and fruits anyway. That's an entirely other battle that needs to be waged in other ways, not through lack of consumption).

My assumption was not that 100% of farmers treat their animals inhumanely. My assumption was that billions of animals are being treated inhumanely. And the way parents treat their children is a red herring. That's not my argument at all. And again, it's outside the realm of my influence.

And to counter your last argument... my same argument above follows for the "food chain/web" argument. Once and for all:

We are rational, amazing, smart, complex and powerful beings on this planet. We have it within our power (each of us) to not eat meat. This is "against nature". But so is basically OUR ENTIRE CIVILIZATION. What makes us truly different from animals is that exact ability. To step back and choose our actions. Are you saying humans not capable of choosing their actions -- those with so much in the 1st world countries? That we're all forced to, by nature, to eat meat? That is the cognitive dissonance I speak of. That we're so special because we are rational beings, but at the same time we must eat meat because we are not rational human beings.

This entire argument was not endorsed by PETA, because they're a bunch of assholes -- but despite being assholes one can't argue that they have brought about change. Change comes from all angles. Grassroots, insane radicals, scientists, humanitarians. They all try to bring change in different ways and succeed influencing different groups. PETA's brazenness is its power. Large corporations, like McDonald's, must respond to such a power. Despite being assholes. Both of them.

--

I want to end on a note of humility -- that I admit to having that same cognitive dissonance when it comes to animals. As a cat owner, I often visualize the mound of turkey carcasses that both of my lovable kittens live on top of. And they truly are carnivores in that they cannot find sustenance outside of meat. How do I rationalize all the turkey deaths (my cats only exclusively eat turkey for some goddamn reason) just so I can have my lovable pets? I can't. And it kills me. Not sure if I'll get cats after they die.

--

Thanks for reading. That was a lot.

Oh and one last thing before Christmas - the economic and ghetto building motivation is so obvious. This enormous wave of people practically runs through Slovenia and Austria, countries with wonderful standards of living, that I would gladly relocate to if I had a good opportunity even just for the skiing - into the muslim "heaven" of awful slums in large German, Swedish, French and Belgian cities. They dont even see this exodus as a chance to escape from their main predicament. I have to admit stupid people frighten me a bit.

I think it gets back to the "ick" factor, @MilkmanDan. I think. See if this makes sense to you:

At the lizard brain level, if you are strongly heterosexual, same sex activity is repulsive to you -- triply so if you are a man watching male activity. It is instinctive, the revulsion, because it comes from the core of your non-verbal brain.

Even if you are completely in favor of anti-discrimination, you can still understand that instinctive revulsion and can sympathize.

The thing is -- that strong revulsion is in part due to not being exposed to the thing that repulses you. See it enough, have friends and family who are LGBT, that instinctive response gets muted.

And bottom line -- yeah. Private businesses who are open to the public cannot discriminate based on who you are.

Sidebar -- when I was in my early 20's, I lived in Los Angeles. It was at the beginning of acceptance of gay culture, which included what I can only label as "slumming." It was fashionable for heterosexuals to go to known gay clubs. This was deeply annoying to the gay folks, of course, because they were out to have a nice time on a Saturday night, not be essentially creatures in a zoo for entertainment value.

The clubs had a really clever way of dealing with it. The standard policy was -- no open-toed shoes. If you were truly friends and not gawkers, you would know to wear the right shoes. If you were a tourist -- well, most women out for the evening wore open toed shoes.

I was young and stupid and was one of those tourists. My friends and I were turned away. Everyone else was miffed. I was immediately impressed with the whole concept. Yeah. I SHOULD be turned away, and weren't they brilliant at finding a way to do it.

I can still see the sneer on the face of the bouncer. He did NOT like us. That was 40 years ago and I still admire him and that business for protecting themselves from us gawkers.

me too and it saddens me to see both Him* and Steve Buscemi slumming in a snickers commercial. I could have forgiven it if there was at least some gratuitous violence.

* that's right... Danny Trejo gets a capital H

Hello Racist

btw. Is this the poor white slum future you speak of ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C2R12xQDDE

Ah hahahahah

White slums are the SAME as black.
Guess it's was NEVER a skin color thing... just a dumb poverty thing
But you probably can't understand that

btw. Most of Russia/Europe/USA is decaying urban concrete. wtf does that have to do with anything...
Please write more, your ignorance is very very funny

oh yeah... "vote against immigration ?" So South Africa, USA AND Australia should AND KICK OUT ALL THE WHITES, since THEY are the immigrants ??? You are soo dumb and probably from Germany/Holland/Switzerland or some other Nazi country

It looks surprisingly neat and tidy. The tour, being authorized, was probably directed just so to show the nicest face of the city: morning rush hour so it looks like there's traffic, not too hot, only the most monument-studded roads, avoiding the slums and whatnot.

and the people chanting "LET HIM DIE!!" are supposedly in the "pro-life" party.

I have no problem with personal responsibility. Contrary to what the GOP, Tea Party, and Libertarians would have you believe, pretty much everyone believes in personal responsibility and having consequences for your actions.

But there is a significant difference between:

1. Hey, you made a bad choice, sorry, but you don't get to have a two week vacation in cancun, you don't get to buy your kids the latest iPhone, sorry, that new car will have to wait a bit. You'll probaby have to sell your expensive home, yet still be able to have a basic home or afford a non-slum apt still.

and

2. Hey you made a bad choice, you now have to go live in an alleyway and/or live your life in severe physical pain and have a shortened life-span. Sorry, you won't be able to send your kids to college or retire now. Oh and I forgot, we're also going to make it as hard as possible for you to recover from your bad choice. You might as well brand yourself a failure forever. No second chance for you!

dead people can't learn things.

read your response.
a lot of postulating and assumptions.
i know (or assume) not with ill-intent,but still there.
gonne have to go bullet form here..blech..loathe bullet form.
please forgive.

1.i did not suggest "full-blown" socialism.nor did i suggest we do what has been tried in the past.
silly,un-imaginative tripe fed by over-paid and dull thinking professors.
ever wonder why there is an economics course and a business admin course?
there is a reason for that.one is theory the other practical application.
and economists get it wrong...and often.

2.you mentioned twice socialism in relation to fascism.
are you aware they are not even on the same playing card?
meh..i guess we could call the corporate socialism we have now a form of fascism...but it would be a stretch.
do not confuse a political system with an economic one.

3.you think everything should be subject to a free market.even firefighters,police and roads.
i do not think you thought that particular nugget through.

the problems with socialism are well documented and well understood.
as are the problems with capitalism.
the real problems arise when things are not taught properly.

problems arise when people are taught that democracy and capitalism are somehow like peas and carrots.meant for each other.
that they are the end all be all and make jesus smile.

corporate propaganda bullshit.
france is a democracy.
they have capitalism AND socialism.
in fact..when you look how how many of the european socialist countries are doing and compare them to..well..us.they seem to be doing quite well for themselves.
so i dont know where you get your "socialism is a failure" idea from.

i guess i owe you an apology.you thought i was attacking you in some manner.not at all.
i was stating your right to disagree with me.

i was not conflating that somehow socialized medicine is somehow better or produces better health and that somehow a free market person wants death to all kittens.

my point is that health care should be a collective project but i believe i also entertained a free market solution as well.
BUT..the playing field has to..MUST..be level for all players.
it appears that some of my comments you took as directed towards you my friend.
this is not the case.
unless you ARE healthcare and in that case i am in the matrix.

the quote i posted is from adam smith.from his stellar book 'wealth of nations".
too bad his words have been twisted and contorted to not even have the same meaning anymore.oftentimes it is professors who perpetrate this travesty.

what adam smith was trying to convey is that for a free market to truly work as balancing agent and force corrector there had to be absolute liberty.
but we dont have that do we?
therefore it stands to reason we cannot have a free market.

ok ok.
i do not "feel" we live in a plutocracy.
i know it.
a legislation that has been purchased by wall street and corporate elite to enact laws which benefit them and their companies in the form of capital gain is..by definition..plutocracy.

smart ass

look man.
i think we are coming from the same place but have come to different conclusions.
you know..opinions.

you mentioned cuba as an example of poor socialized medicine.
well allow me to point out bangledesh slums,or somlia and their roving band of warlords.
they have free markets.

the discussion you and i are having is really 'what is governments role".
i agree with so many of your points..truly.
in my opinion the governments role in regards to commerce should be that a fraud police.thats it.
AND to dissolve the corporation and go back to the 1864 model.
if we cant do that at least..the very least...rewrite the corporate charter.
if we cant do that can we at LEAST put back the line "for the public good" (removed in 1967 or 68).
and make these huge entities accountable for their actions and made liable for any and all :death,destruction,disease and suffering.

could we..could we ..please pa..could we?

weeeeell,thats never gonna happen.the reason the west developed was due to governments and corporations getting in bed with each other.
no way america would have the standard of living we have without that ugly beast.

people think america goes to war for ideology?
ha! not a chance.
its fucking business baby!

so..yeah.
my friend there are no easy answers.
and i apologize if you took my previous comment as an attack on you in any way.
never..ever ever.
i respect and admire you immensely.
though i disagree with you on this,that will never take away on how i perceive you.

i am a dissident.
an anarchist.
i have unplugged from the system many moons ago.i refuse to feed the beast.
i did my duty and gave this country a few years and then turned my back and walked away.
which i know may seem in contradiction to what i am proposing in regards to healthcare.
maybe i am naive in some respects,but government does have a role and i would prefer it to be at the betterment of its citizens.
social security has been a great success (not according to some people but look at the stats..it has been fantastic).

you are so right that this is not an issue handled and packaged in one easy sitting.it takes discussion of hard truths.
but for that to happen there has to be respect and i respect you immensely my friend.
it is getting late and i am one pooped lil puppy.
but i am fully enjoying my conversation with you.

let me end with sharing a man who makes an argument so much better than i could.
he is an economist.so he is probably wrong.

Looks like the more conventional type of slum you see in that and other parts of the world. Huge shanty towns build out of and sometimes on top of garbage, I wonder if that view was meant to give some sense of how many families lived in that tower, only spread out.